tick over OT

In Glasgow, no. You'll be fined £20.

If it is an ordinary car then mechanically yes, it is ok, although some car makers do not recommend long idling periods citing catalyst damage.

thedeerhunter270 (thedeerhunter270 ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

It probably won't hurt the car, but it's not exactly the least polluting thing you could do, is it...?

Not if it's on the highway.

See HWC rule 239:

• you MUST switch off the engine, headlights and fog lights

HTH

Chris

Even if you could legally do it, I would suggest that it's morally bankrupt given all the worries about the environment at the moment.

It's depressing just how many people do exactly that though. I quite often have to wait to pick my daughter up from Guides and find myself gnashing my teeth at the selfishness of other parents as they sit for ten minutes with their engines running and their brake lights dazzling everyone as they're too lazy to even pull the handbrake on.

Well, it's a bit daft. You are wasting fuel and causing pollution. If you have a turbo car, it seems its a bad idea- from tdiclub.com:

[quote] It is not recommended to let the TDI engine idle for extended periods of time. Aside from wasting fuel, causing unnecessary emissions, and not accomplishing anything (the engine won't warm up at idle anyway), the turbocharger depends on having a certain minimum level of boost pressure to maintain the condition of the seals. Extended periods of idling may cause a certain amount of oil consumption, and the oil consumption may clog the catalytic converter. Some owners who have let their engine idle for a long time report the engine running poorly for some time afterward. And no, you don't need to worry about what's going to happen if you get stuck in a traffic jam now and again, it's not THAT serious. Just don't start the engine 20 minutes before you want to leave in the morning every day, in the false hope of having a warm interior.

I'm sure its not the case here but one notices plenty of men parking in the pick up points or the disabled waiting for their wives with the engine running. #You can see they're not happy, its their wives fault, waiting/wasting time here. be a real man and park, go in and help - also it may save time

Afterr all the food is for you too innit?

Not so. That comes under the heading of Parking. Not to stopping and remaining in the car. As long as you are on the road in a place where you can legally park, there is no legal requirement to switch the engine off. It is only illegal to leave a car unattended on the highway with the engine running. Mike.

Right, I hadn't read the OP properly :-)

It's still a bit anti-social however.

Chris

Yes.

Probably ;-)

I wouldn't turn an engine off if I knew I'd be starting it again within a 'few' minutes. Maybe 5 minutes. Or 10. I certainly would never turn an engine off at traffic lights or a level crossing, unlike some 'green' muppets.

Turning the engine off saves a little fuel. Not much though.

It's starting the engine that causes the problems. Perhaps the mixture is richer? Maybe a little unburnt fuel get through (damaging the cat)? The big problem though is the juice taken from the battery, which has to be recharged. The charging puts extra load on the alternator, which uses more fuel. Environmentally (yuk), I suspect it's better to let the engine run for a few minutes if you know you will be driving off shortly. Practically, do you really want to put the extra load on the starter relay and starter motor, let the oil drain down from the top end so it get a dry start again, suck 300 amps out of your battery again, and then waste fuel by doing the pointless blip on the accelerator?

Best bet - Get your woman to get the bus or take a taxi. Environmentally (yuk) disasterous, but at least you're not wearing your car out :-)

Al.

I think I looked this up on Google previously. If you were going to leave the car ticking over for more than one and a half minutes, it's more efficient to turn the engine off. Another one I seem to remember hearing is it's more efficient to leave a florescent tube on for 24hrs than it is to switch it on and off more than once. Dunno why I mention that, guess it's the more extreme example I've heard of. Ah yeah, you could be one of those lads who's strapped a florescent tubes underneath your car.

Regards,

Tim

That one's quite badly wrong.

mentions the answer - the only reason to leave it on any longer than you absolutely need to is to do with the tube degrading at switch-on, not the power it uses.

cheers, clive

It's less than that, quite a few BMWs & VWs do it automatically nowadays.

Well that would be bollocks, the start current on a switch start fluoros upto ten times the running current, but that's only whilst it's starting, then it's dimmer whilst it warms up.

Because whilst the cylinders cool you get acid damage from the combustion products.

That takes a lot of unburnt fuel

That nets out to sod all quite quickly. 300 Amps for a second is 1/2hp for

10seconds.

Don't blipthe throttle then, it's a hot engine.

They did that on Mythbusters recently (for British values of recently). It's bollocks, for a fuorescent tube the amount of energy saved by not switching off would be burnt in a few seconds. I can't remember how long exactly it may have been 15 seconds or 45 seconds.

Thanks for all your replies.

I had to go to the local shops to pick up a heavy item. The drive was no more than 1000m. I was going to be parked in a off road car park.

I thought - if I leave the engine running it may well charge the battery a bit, and evaporate off some condensation within the engine and exhaust.

The environmental consideration did cross my mind, but then, I thought if I stop the car then I start it again, the extra fuel used to start would be about the same as I'd use ticking over for 15 minutes?

thedeerhunter270 (thedeerhunter270 ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

There is no "extra fuel used to start". No such thing.

More fuel is injected to a cold engine, yes, roughly equivalent to using the choke on an old carb'd engine to restrict the air. But that'll be exactly the same for the minute or two it takes you to drive home again as for roughly the same amount of time idling.

As a flip side, leaving a car idling when cold can cause the very rich mixture to wash the oil off the bores, exacerbating wear. The best way to warm a car up is to drive it, not leave it idling.

That's exactly when you wouldn't want toleaveit idling.

No.